You back-stabbing, double-dealing, traitorous scum. While you could be forgiven
if the events of 911, Pearl Harbor, Oklahoma bombing, the Branch Davidian Siege,
and numerous other incidents of murder having occurred a thousand years ago... your actions
of describing the Orlando LGBT murders as the worst and bloodiest massacre in U.S.
history is a disgusting betrayal to the multiple memories of death and destruction
the people of the Nation still live with. Shame on you. You have damaged your
reputation not only with the people of the Nation, but billions of others in the
world who come to realize they too must question the faith they have held for
Journalists living amongst them. You can not be trusted to tell the truth... because
your truth is whatever helps you in your careers regardless how much you must distort
reality. You can not be relied upon for reporting events in a professional, unbiased
fashion. If this is what University courses in Journalism are teaching, they might
as well be shut down. You need no college degree to be a professional liar. We
now know it is not the U.S. flag that you wave, but the rainbow one. You have desecrated
the expression "We Will Never Forget", because you indulge in sycophantic inclinations
of selective memory.

Your betrayal of the American people is similar to that now being contemplated
by Bernie Sanders. It is pathetically stupid for him to consider that the Democratic
Party, Congress or Hillary will adopt any of his stock-in-trade campaign assertions. The
Democratic Leadership, the Congress, nor Hillary give a damn about Bernie's ideas.
All they care about is winning the Presidential Election no matter what empty
promises to Bernie and his followers are made. They can not be trusted just like the
National media can not be trusted... and nor can Obama and his followers... because
they all lie through their smiling teeth and practice selective memory. Hillary
could care less for the people or she would have Bernie as her Vice President...
the same goes for Trump. The question remains whether Bernie will do the right thing
for the people... not for the Democratic Party, not for some rationalized government
status quo nonsense, not for anything except for the people to have control of the
government... as a Real Democracy should be. We are sick and tired of this pretend
democracy the U.S. and other countries have been practicing at the expense of the
public. The People say to hell with the members of Congress, party affiliation,
the Electoral system, the frivolous government of falsified democracy, and especially
Hillary... It's bad enough for the people to have to choose between two dumb blondes.

Bernie must do what is right for the people, just as the philosophy of his campaign
was focused on. To do otherwise, is to earmark this Presidential Election as that to
be remembered for its Public Betrayal by all the candidates (including those who got
out of the race), the election process, the political debates, the government, all
the political parties, and in particular, the National Media— supported by
local Journalists. The media is often the source for so much social discord such as
the fallout from the Brexit result... that is strongly giving the impression of
having been orchestrated. The public can not be certain that the Brexit voting
tally was correct... or wasn't an instance contrived to produce circumstances
involving a deliberate attempt distract public attention. It's timing during the
American election is felt by some to be too much of a coincidence.

If a political protest is to succeed, protestors must target the National media.
We must use the same tactics on them as they do on the public... though many of us
shake our heads at all the dim-wittedness the National media can come up with.
To be fair, Journalists faced with deadlines frequently find themselves producing
copy as if they were working for a comic book publishing house or fringe-top magazine.
Whereas there are frequent distortions of facts, or they pander to the whims of
elected officials— if not using their position to voice a personal opinion
in favor of this or that... or against it. How a topic is or isn't journalistically
covered can standardize the role that truth is perceived and practiced. For example,
instead of admitting that both Trump and Clinton are decidedly less than what the
Nation needs in terms of Executive Branch leadership, they make a choice to serve
one or the other, but exclude the public from their equation. Many journalists don't
simply cover the news, they try to promote a view point as if it were already a fact.
Under such conditions, a protest movement can be faced by an army of journalists
set against them. Hence, a protest movement with a distinctly articulated agenda,
must include a movement to target the National media.

But let us at the very least acknowledge the effort of those Journalists participate
in an effort to provide the truth when they serve up a fact checking article about
what a person (such as a political candidate) has said. Such efforts are no doubt
much appreciated by those readers interested in unraveling what is and and what
is not valid, as well as determining what level of lying a person engages in.
However, who fact checks the media? For example, when a journalist says that a
majority of people think or feel in such a way, we must question the validity since
the readers themselves make up the populace from which a Referendum on the subject
has supposedly taken place to make such a determination... yet no such referendum
ever took place. Likewise, for another example, when a Journalist makes a claim
that their information is in accord with some latest polls, they do not also tell
us who conducted the polls, nor where, when and how they were conducted. As far as
we can tell, their comments are made-up stories to meet a deadline, which permits
them to introduce "copy" with material describing supposition without identifying
it as a transcribed fairy tale. Journalists are not typically monitored for veracity,
unless it is done by their own kind... as a sort of "in house" policing that is
supposed to take place in many institutions, businesses and organizations, but
often occurs only marginally so. In short, the public must not only be skeptical
what Journalists are saying, but must be customarily targeted to verify their
information in order to improve the sloppy standards of Journalism now being practiced.

When Journalists speak about political situations, they do not also discuss
issues in terms of Sociology and History. They frequently make things up, and in
so doing, exhibit a bias of their organization's prevailing perspective. For example,
the recent indulgence to label the shooting of LGBT members in an Orlando Nightclub
as the "Worst or bloodiest Massacre in U.S. history", or that "The Nation is heart-broken".
This highlights the fact that the National media engages in selective memory since
it fails to take into account such things as the 911 event... which many believe
was undoubtedly staged by members or associates of the U.S. Government, since the
actors involved in the aircraft kamikaze runs did not have the intellectual or
financial wherewithal to carry out such attacks on their own. It also describes the
media's attempt to suggest it represents the views of the majority... though neither
Obama nor the media were unanimously selected to do so. They should not try to put
words in a Nation of so many millions who undoubtedly have their own views, but are
never given a chance to provide an unedited version thereof. Interviewing a handful
is not Representative of 300+ million... no matter what system of rationalized logic
is used. However, by engaging in such selective memory, they are better enabled to
show their biased support for the LGBT colonies scattered here and there. The National
Media is not representing the majority of the public's views, because like politicians
who supposedly "represent" the people; they do not actually know what the people feel
nor think. Neither the media nor the members of Congress conduct periodic National
Referendums from which laws can be established which truly reflect the Will of the
People. Instead, they rely on silly polls and make rationalized excuses for doing
so based on the various rationalized guesstimations that so-called professionals
engage in as part of their ego-structuring.

We the People did not vote the National or local media groups to speak on our
behalf. Nor do elected officials, particularly since none of them were voted into
office by way of a unanimous decision. In addition, it is needless to say that
individuals who are selected by one or more politicians to serve an office, do not
represent the people either. They may represent themselves, the person who selected
them, or some assumed fanciful "government" notion... but they don't represent the
people. Even though such people, including the media take it upon themselves to
presume that they are the key spokesperson for practicing the right of free speech,
the people did not directly vote on this provision. It is a self-adopted entitlement
that exercises an additional presumed right to upstage the public's right to
speak for itself. The people are customarily denied the right to discuss and vote
on any and all issues they want to. Neither the media nor the government wants to
relinquish their marginalizing pedestals. Hence, our protest movement targeting
the government must also target the media. While we prefer not to use violence,
it must be remembered that every government does so as a viable means to assert
its views, even if those views do not reflect the Will of the Public. When we
have both a government and media that does not listen to the collective Will of
the people because there are no established protocols for doing so, and those
channels for doing so are ludicrous examples thereof, what are We The People to do?

Whereas the media thinks it carries a badge of immunity which enables it to
seek us out no matter where we are, we too can play at this tactic... though a new
term other than "paparazzi" will have to be coined in order to portray a system of
protest which uses groups of individuals to seek out the media just as the media
does to the public, professionals or politicians, hounds them without end. We can be on
their doorsteps, their places of work and recreation, and engage them night and day
with incessant calls for interviews that are repeated with the same information
over and over again. Indeed, we can create our own system of targeting media that
acts as a group of assertive Professional lobbyists.

Indeed, we can be just as myopic and self-centered as the media is. And we can
print or voice retractions for deliberate falsehoods meant to influence opinion.
We can engage in character assassinations and background checks meant to be used
as bribery. We can take polls conducted amongst like-minded friends and pretend we
don't completely understand a confused situation in an attempt to convey the image
of distortion simply because we disagree with a given presentation. Yes, we can use
the same back-stabbing double-dealing techniques involving bribery and ambush. But
we will do so in the open, so that the public is fully aware we are doing so as a
mirror-image of how the government and media conducts itself. No less, we can be
highly organized in our secret attempts to uncover secrets presented in an open
forum plagued with biases.

For some, "targeting the media" means to carry out a deliberate act of violence.
Such violence would no doubt be labeled, by the media, as the worst and bloodiest
domestic terrorist attack... if a certain number of workers in the media were killed.
Exactly how many would need to be killed is uncertain, but bets are it is in the
range of much fewer than any other "mass" killing, since the word "mass" is
alternatively defined by arbitrary standards... and is not used for such things
as "mass" raindrops fell yesterday, or that a person received a massive dose of
bee stings, or the is a mass assemblage of holes in one's underwear. For others,
"targeting the media" is little more than a means to convey that the Media can not
be depended on... can not be trusted to deliver the correct message for a protest
because of ulterior motives that parasitically seeks out some event to use as a
symbiotic mode of conveyance for something else that is hoped will bring about
circumstances to involve the media in more intense efforts. And yet, for still others,
"targeting the media" means to carry out a program of deliberate intensification
of protest efforts that will unequivocally emphasize the tenacious depth of seriousness.

Although it is easy enough to kill a bunch of innocent (unsuspecting) people
to exhibit an act of rage, jealousy, disgust or by way of following orders, members
of conscientious movements for corrective social change have difficulty in
rationalizing such insanity. These types of activities require religion, patriotism,
or a radicalized political perspective that has gravitated towards extremism due
to personal conditions that convince a person they are in a desperate situation...
whether or not they are conscious of it. It is desperation which can be fueled by
both Media and government actions... or non-actions. These two entities seem
surprisingly unable to grasp the situation that many in the public are seeking a
movement that will end the dominance of the present media and government perspectives,
which are viewed as being counter-productive to the interests of the public's need
for growth. Both the government and the media have indulged in a self-created
entitlement of fantasy for too long. But a one-of-a-kind horrific event is not
enough to create a sustained move towards productive methods for enhancing social
self-governance with an intended desire for creating a better society... however
it may be defined or labeled in the future since the present definition and usage
of the "democracy" label are poor examples thereof... As can be seen by the recent
falsified labeling of the government and media with respect to the killings in the
Orlando LGBT event, the memories of presumed officials is particularly short and
selective.

Indeed, the Media and Obama should apologize to the Nation and world for such
a gross error in judgment, compounded by saying "we're" (the Nation) is heart broken
as opposed to "we're" (Obama and the Media) are trying to convey their personal
views as if they were National ones. Though you both need to apologize, you won't,
even if a gun were held to your head... at least not in a public venue...since
both want to use it as a means to go after Trump, though not necessarily assist
Hillary. Every single social event is used for some other ulterior motive. Your
comments are merely scripts for some other agenda. The LGBT community of colonies
would be foolish to embrace such expressions as being genuine... though some will
since they grasp onto anything that appears favorable since the majority of opinion
is commonly negative. They need something as large as their parading methods of
over-compensation for feelings of inadequacy... that nothing but various forms of
colony-practiced inebriation help to numb self-disparaging personal reflections.

It is unfortunate that the public is forced to become radicalized by a media
and government that does not know how to grasp beyond the traditions of perspective
which continue to create so much social disharmony and disenfranchisement. Ignoring
or attempting to sublimate it will not make it go away or surrender to neurotic forms
of government practice. Many Sociologists and Political Scientists also do not readily
perceive this need for developing a better functionality of governance because their
career or academic interests force them to specialize in enclaves of consideration
which is a fancy way of describing the use of accepted blinders, as one might put
on a horse until such time as a given perspective is habitually memorized. The fact
of the matter remains that more and more are viewing our social situation as an
acceptable inevitability that a Revolution must occur... because there is no other
alternative for the people to acquire a New Government— a Cenocracy. There
exists no government-established means for the people to effectively inculcate their
collective opinion for creating laws and policies which best suits the desired
growth of the Nation as part of a global village. The government and the media
force us to become radicalized. The present governing philosophy of a pretended
democracy and the philosophy of practiced Journalism is a distasteful joke.

Thus far, there has been no large domestic group that have staged a violent
expression of its perspective. And no, neither the Occupy (Occuparchist) movement
or Black protests are representative of the type of violence being indicated here.
Such representations have been carried out by only one or two individuals who resort
to using violence against innocents... which details a cowardice... like so many
suicide bombers have done, as well as law enforcement who used a tank against the
Branch Davidian group. When innocents are exploited, abducted, or killed, most of
us are genuinely outraged, even if those who have been targeted practice a perspective
we ourselves do not share. For example, though many do not believe in the philosophy
that the LGBT community of colonies do, it is not hypocritical for us to share in
the grief which accompanies the needless loss of life... even if we at the same
time exhibit a disgust for their life-style. This is not a schizophrenia (ambivalence)
unique to our era, it is a portrait of the complexification of social issues that
we are required to become adept with, but may harbor conflicting consternations
about; which are brought to the foreground of consciousness under given situations.
Many things are not so easily described by a black and white, yes or no, right or
wrong dichotomy. Different answers, as well as different rationales, are contextually
driven. In other words, many of us share in an undisclosed philosophy of having
limits we may come to exercise sometimes more... or sometimes less... depending
on circumstances. It is not an act of immorality to dislike or hate one or another
minority... though such minorities may want such a perspective to be seen as
commensurate with some unholy act... just as Obama and the Media are trying to
impose their rationale of reality on us by an incessant application of stupidity.

The National Media, in so much as this is the main topic at hand, though some
readers may be inclined to include isolated journalistic practices by referencing
one or more local media operations, has been painting a target on itself for quite
some time. And a few observers have taken one or another (symbolic) pot shot at
them for a specific or generalized orientation. But we are not talking about engaging
in a shooting gallery exposition found at a carnival or fair grounds deployment for
which a stuffed animal or ridiculous trinket might be won. They have made us into
those who have begun collective discussions about a needed predation. It is similar
to the predatorial orientation seen when protestors gather to discuss strategies
for effecting purposive government reform.

The trouble is, the old methods of protest for social reform are seen as ineffectual
tools. We need a new game plan, as are many aware of. Petitioning the government
is a joke, because it has established protocols for deflecting or diminishing such
efforts... and the Executive Branch egotistically claims ownership thereof because,
as one might interpret from such ownership, it views itself as "the government"...
and all other branches as being subsidiary. If this were not true, then a petition
to the government would simultaneously be received by all branches, but each must
provide a response... and not engage in a hoop-jumping scenario of dismissiveness
if a certain number of signatures are not received. Every single citizen should
be respected for their opinion. The silliness of the presently practiced "Petition
the Government" formula is likewise echoed in the notion of writing letters to
Congressional Representatives... since it is a staff member who might well reply
to a letter, that is if it is at all read.

No less, marching through streets carrying banners appear to be more effective
in letting people vent anger and frustration than they do in accomplishing anything
of certainty. With such regulated obstacles in our efforts to bring about corrective
social change, it is unfortunate that we must turn to more assertive methodologies
that some readers may interpret to mean direct aggression... since this is what
both the government and the media do, with respect to their individual armaments.
In as much as the government would like the public that aggression does work (or
that crime does not pay), one need only review historical and current events to
know that the government and the media engage in the use of such in different ways.
In other words, though the government may resort to the usage of firearms, the
media uses its traditional penmanship sword that is frequently double-edged and
sometimes alternatively designed to make any secret agent jealous of such an arsenal.

For example, assertive predations against extremist perspectives such as the LGBT
(Lost Girls and Boys Totem) community of colonies foster... even though the public
is being subjected to government and media tactics of censorship that disallows
members of the public from having a means of exercising a contrary opinion in terms
of voting on adoptive laws; or in so doing are labeled as having a social pathology
defined by a convoluted reverse psychology practice— does not provide for a
public incentive to push for a desperately needed alteration in the functionality
of the government. But let us disentangle the foregoing for those readers not adept
at approximating a dot to dot scenario rendered in a vernacular that is not so
easily intelligible to some:

The LGBT community consists of different colonies (practices in different locations)...

Has a conglomeration of different sexual-oriented ideas many disagree with for different reasons.

The government and the media have teamed up to disparage attempts by a dissenting
public to voice opinions against the communities.

The LGBT community and its fawning advocates believe the alternative life-styles
are akin to an under-dog force of Revolutionaries extolling a virtuous form of patriotism
similar to a French Underground in WWII, that buck a system of adopted tradition
by practicing unconventional views.

The media and government use the "tools and weapons" of their separate institutions
to muffle and isolate the voices of those who disagree, and ask for a National
Referendum in dealing with a situation involving a media and government that are
complicit in forcing the majority into a level of subservience akin to indentured
servitude and slavery.

Both the government and media practice lies, deceits, selective memory and
selective listening to promote their neurotic ideas of Liberty, Freedom, Happiness,
Equality, and Justice.

The majority has no real voice, and is the actual under-dog under the current
impositions of the media and government.

Whereas the Janus-faced (two-faced) activities of the government are widely
known, those of the media are concealed in its practiced double-talk... learned
from its partnership with a government whose officials use the language of double-speak.

The media is very problematic and must be dealt with by way of an extreme
methodology in confronting its many corruptions against the public... with particular
emphasis on its coordinated efforts with the government by frequently engaging in
disseminations of convoluted information that pit one sector of the public against
another sector.

Though many in the public are no doubt happy that the deaths of a few members
of an Orlando based LGBT colony occurred, many of us do not react in the excessive
manner that Obama and the media have, such that history is denied and that the
cause for such a calamity occurring in the first place though to be directly related
to firearms. No matter if a gun, knife, or bomb was wielded, such things are only
tools or weapons put to use by a person. Likewise, while we could simply walk into
a large media environment and kill whomever was nearby, this would only indicate
a calloused stupidity... when our actual overall intent is to alter the cultures
of the media and the government. The media and the government are considerably
problematic for the people to establish an enhanced form of self-governance over
the present pretended form of democracy. We need to ram their pretend form of
Democracy down their throats.

Killing a handful of LGBT members and/or supporters, will not readily accomplish
a change in governance or the neurotic practices being employed by many members of
the media. Nor does killing a group of Blacks, Hispanics, Whites, Native Americans,
Asian, Pacific Islanders, Religious practitioners, etc... And we can not expect to
create a better form of self-governance if our own anti-government position adopts
the perspective of a minority such as that embraced by the LGBT community of colonies.
One of the (many) problems those connected with a Cenocratic (New Government) perspective
have consistently encountered is that anti-government ideas are sublimated along
channels described by feelings about minor issues enlarged by the intensity of
emotions being employed as defensive gestures that conceal inexperienced instances
for examining one's position of logic. Not too infrequently do we find the practice
of unconventionalities interpreted as an indication of something unique... as a
personalized model of over-compensation for realizations of perceived inadequacy.
Simply put, such people are not particularly familiarized with themselves in situations
of self-examination, with respect to comparisons of alternative ideas... and thus
by way of accustomed repetitious thinking, will defend their perspective even if
they come to appreciate the false nature of their logic. Some people do not know
how to react spontaneously to an ephiphany, and will thus defend a previous ignorance
until an extended period of time is spent in reflection.

While it is difficult enough to get different non-professional people to discuss
an issue about government reform from their individual perspectives in order to
find a common ground of unity... or acceptance that they are all somewhat mistaken
in the objectives needed to be undertaken; the situation is compounded exponentially
when confronting someone who believes their adopted professionalism in one field
automatically guarantees them with the added advantage of harboring an above average
system of logic that can be applied to any and all situations. For example, many
people think their anti-government attitude is to be equated with a certainty of
profound on-of-a-kind exclusivity of character equal to any and all who have stood
in the foreground of a Revolution, or have participated in what is believed to be
underground activity against a perceived foe or evility.

...Thus, for example, when they come across others who are focusing on the idea
that social problems are the result of the government being too big, they reiterate
this notion as if it were an absolute. There is an often practiced inclination to
go along with a crowd as if a "safety in numbers" ethic can be equated with truth
in like-mindedness. But such a perspective, that social problems are the result of
the Government being Too Big is based on a fallacy. Government is not Too Big, it
is Too Small. When a democracy is supposed as a government Of, By and For All the
people, then the size of a given population is the size the government is supposed
to be. In a population of 300+ million, such as the U.S., this is a really Big
Government. Unfortunately, in practice, the concerted Will of people is not used
to run their government. Their role is minimized by a government structure which
enables only a few to run it. The people have no actual collective voice.

The situation of living in a society which claims that it is a government Of, By
and For All the people but is actually run by a few elected "Representatives" and
their selective members, is made worse by a media who takes it upon themselves to
assert their opinions as if they Represent the public. The public itself is not
permitted to do so, and when it does, this opinion frequently becomes truncated
by policies and procedures like most gaming institutions are, in order to get the
lions share of all contributions... where in the case of many government employees,
is the ability to dictate terms to the majority by labeling such dictates as
policy, procedure, rule, etc... Representatives do not represent the people since
the Will of the People is rarely given the opportunity to collectively express
what that Will is... and the media also does not represent the Will of the People
because it does not openly discuss the need for actual and honest governing laws
that would enable the Peoples' Will to be correctly identified. Simply arranging
questions and comments in order to channel predispositions into being represented
by a contrived poll or piece-meal discussion is particularly pathetic when these
same media representatives take it upon them selves to lie about or exclude poll
results, as well as redefine discussed information within the restricted guidelines
of interest or the comprehension of one's own convictions.

The media, not too infrequently, acts as a sycophant to the government... or
some government practice. If a media outlet has an over-riding ulterior motive
wanting to be reinforced, it attempts to do so by exploiting an event supported
by a government spokesperson, no matter how much they must lie, since to lie means
they can simply claim they stretched the truth or print some meager retraction. It,
like the government, has their own values of practiced immunity standards which
laws have guaranteed loopholes for permitting the public to be taken advantage of.
For example, in the wake of the Orlando LGBT killings, Obama saw an opportunity to
influence public opinion to side with an attendant political motive involving the
current Presidential race, through over-valued emotional rhetoric regarding the deaths.
The media nor the government can be trusted for exhibiting actual feelings since
they are coupled with such a stark representation of falsified history. Imagine
claiming that the deaths if 49 people represent the greatest American tragedy when
there are many other examples of death and associated destruction which surmount
this quantity. No one should trust an over-valued expression of emotion when it is
aligned with a lie which disrespects those thousands which have died by way of
actions now defined as domestic terrorism which enables the government and the media
to practice different protocols of behavior... which includes lying to the public.

Both the media and the government owe the Nation an apology, without resorting
to the now practiced acceptance where the guilty do not have to admit to any guilt...
but are permitted instead to retire with a full pension, or simply pay a fine that
is given back along some other negotiated channel not readily recognized by a public
duped into believing the nonsense being fed to it by the media and the government.
Yet, neither the media nor the government want to engage in soliciting the double-standard
Justice system to effect a criminal standard with suitable punishment; because they
may at some time be caught with their own pants down and want an accessible get-out-of-jail
free card because they had indulged the same to another... as a type of tit-for-tat
unspoken contractual agreement that the public is not enabled to share in.

The media and government frequently engage in the practice of exhibiting one
example as being representative of a whole. For a minor example, take the situation
with a reported above average temperature for Phoenix, Arizona, but the article's
heading claims the situation exists for the entire Southwest... yet no other location
in the Southwest is being mentioned. This exaggeration is a lie... and one lie
leads to others and then this becomes the accepted standard of reporting... but to
point out the mistake is tantamount to accusing the media of committing something
that they can then sue a person for slander! They help to perpetuate a social
atmosphere of irrationality in perception. Truth doesn't matter anymore... just
so long as someone's career is assisted.

Again and again and again the public is met with snapshot articles featuring
hostility. And when there are no readily available examples, the media, and/or
the government, make them up by using their own forms of hostility against this
or that group, this or that person, this or that situation. Each in their own way
utilizes whatever palette best suits the picture they want to paint. While obama
works on his agenda to downplay the role radical Islamists have in terrorism by
intimating that a few don't represent the whole, his hypocritical comment about
the Nation being heart-broken about the death of a handful of LGBT members when
he neither represents the Nation nor permits the Nation to speak on its own without
its voice being stuffed full of nonsense printed by the media regarding the event
as the worst or bloodiest massacre in U.S. history; is counter-balanced by the
government's efforts... assisted by the media, to paint some Americans as Right-wing
extremists because they attempt to defend a rationality that neither the government
nor the media support... though they both once did. Heaven forbid if Obama and today's
media existed during the Dawn of the Revolution since the Founding Fathers would
be cited as Right-Wing Extremists. The government and the media are pitting the
people of the nation against one another, and thus, it is they who must be targeted.

(Whereas this link describes how burglars use social media to target people, it is
of value to note that the media frequently uses its own make-shift burglary tools
to target the public. The media is not immune from hiring those who conduct self-styled
social pathologies against the public, just as the government does by way of individuals,
departments, agencies, or branches. For example, the Supreme Court's ruling that
business entities are individuals is ludicrous, because it allows individuals in
a business to escape prosecution by nefarious actions performed by a company imagined
as acting on its own account, and not because of any single action by an company
employee, though the singular actions of multiple employees can cause a company to
effect criminality against the public.)